LCQ14: Complaint handling mechanism of Medical Council of Hong Kong
*******************************************************************
Question:
At present, the Medical Council of Hong Kong (MCHK) is responsible for handling complaints about the professional conduct of registered medical practitioners in Hong Kong. The mechanism for handling such complaints is as follows: (1) initial consideration by the chairman and the deputy chairman of the Preliminary Investigation Committee (PIC) in consultation with a lay member of that committee to decide whether the complaint is groundless, frivolous or not pursuable, or that it should be referred to PIC for full consideration, (2) PIC to decide whether there is a prima-facie case such that the complaint should be referred to MCHK for an inquiry, and (3) MCHK to conduct an inquiry. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether the aforesaid mechanism has specified:
(i) the circumstances under which the chairman and the deputy chairman of PIC are required to seek assistance from external experts; whether channels are currently available for the complainants to gain access to or knowledge of the views and opinions submitted by such experts; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(ii) the matters to be considered and the procedure to be followed by PIC when deciding whether to refer a case to MCHK for an inquiry; if so, of the details;
(iii) that the defendant must submit to PIC a written explanation for or testimony of his conduct or of any matter alleged in the complaint, and the circumstances under which the complainant may have access to such explanation or testimony;
(2) given that under the existing legislation, if PIC decides that no inquiry is to be held in respect of a case, the complainant does not have any right of access to any information or document relating to the case submitted to PIC by any other person, resulting in the complainant having no way of knowing all of the information relating to the decision, and thus having difficulty in deciding whether to continue to pursue the complaint, whether the authorities will consider reviewing that provision, with a view to enhancing the transparency of the complaint handling mechanism and strengthening the protection of the rights of complainants; and
(3) whether it knows the number of cases in which complainants applied to MCHK in the past five years for access to the information or documents relating to their cases after an inquiry by MCHK was completed; and among them, the respective numbers of applications approved and rejected; of the criteria adopted by MCHK for deciding whether or not to grant approval?
Reply:
President,
The Medical Council of Hong Kong (MCHK) handles complaints related to doctors in accordance with the procedures stipulated in the Medical Registration Ordinance (Cap. 161) and the Medical Practitioners (Registration and Disciplinary Procedure) Regulation (Cap. 161E) (the Regulation).
Currently, upon receipt of a complaint, the chairman or deputy chairman of the Preliminary Investigation Committee (PIC) under MCHK will decide on whether the complaint should be referred to PIC for consideration. If it is considered that the complaint is frivolous or groundless and should not proceed further, the PIC chairman and deputy chairman will, in consultation with a lay member of PIC, decide whether to dismiss the case.
My reply to the three parts of the question raised by the Hon Alice Mak is as follows:
(1) When considering a complaint, the PIC chairman or deputy chairman and PIC may seek assistance and advice from external experts to facilitate their consideration. Generally speaking, if the case is related to medical treatment, the PIC chairman or deputy chairman will seek expert assistance and advice to facilitate their consideration as and when necessary. Depending on the nature, type and complexity of each complaint, the PIC chairman or deputy chairman will seek the views of different independent experts or even legal advice in order to determine, in an objective, fair and impartial manner, whether or not the case is frivolous or groundless and should not proceed further. PIC may seek further expert advice if needed.
For a case which should be referred to PIC for consideration, the PIC chairman or deputy chairman shall direct the Secretary to fix a date upon which PIC is proposed to meet to consider the case. The Secretary shall invite the defendant doctor to submit to PIC in writing any explanation of his/her conduct or of any matter alleged in the complaint. PIC will, having considered any written explanation submitted by the doctor involved and all the materials put before it by the Secretary (including the complaint received, medical reports and expert reports), decide whether or not the complaint should be referred to MCHK for an inquiry.
As prescribed by section 12(2) of the Regulation, if PIC decides that no inquiry is to be held, neither the complainant nor the defendant has any right of access to any information or documents (including the expert advice and written explanation or testimony of the defendant doctor) relating to the case submitted to PIC by any other person. To ensure compliance with section 12(2) of the Regulation, PIC will not provide the complainant with any of the above information or documents before deciding whether to refer the case to MCHK for an inquiry.
If the PIC chairman and deputy chairman decide in consultation with the lay member of PIC, or PIC decides upon detailed consideration of the case that the case should be dismissed and no inquiry should be held, the Secretary will inform the complainant and the defendant doctor of the decision in writing. The Secretary will also inform the complainant of the reasons and justifications for the decision.
(2) To enhance the transparency of the complaint handling mechanism of MCHK, the Government proposes in the Medical Registration (Amendment) Bill 2017 that the restriction on disclosing relevant documents to any other person by PIC under section 12(2) of the Regulation be lifted.
(3) The number of cases in which complainants applied to MCHK for access to the information or documents relating to their cases after the completion of inquiries by MCHK and the number of applications approved in the past five years (from 2013 to 2017) are set out in the Annex.
When considering whether to disclose to the complainant any information or documents relating to the complaint, MCHK, apart from complying with section 12(2) of the Regulation, will also consider whether the disclosure is fair to both the complainant and the defendant doctor.
Ends/Wednesday, January 31, 2018
Issued at HKT 12:26
Issued at HKT 12:26
NNNN